Witchery asks for review after ad watchdog rules picture ‘sexualised’ children
Clothing brand Witchery has asked for a review of a decision by the Advertising Standards Board (ASB) over an image from a campaign which was deemed to amount “to a depiction of a child which is sexualised”.
The image complained about was a still shot taken for the ‘WitcheryKids’ campaign ‘It’s Our World’, which features a girl wearing the brand’s product and dancing and listening to music.
A complaint to the ASB read: “The still video frame image shows a young girl with legs apart wearing a short skirt that has been shot on a low angle that focuses on the models crotch. I find this image extremely offensive as a mother to a daughter.”
Parent company The Country Road Group (CRG) defended the image, telling the ad watchdog it was “disappointed” the complaint had been received, and said they did “not consider the imagery to be sexual in nature nor does it imply that children are sexual beings”.
I’d agree. It’s a bit creepy when you look at how young the child looks in the face.
If the hero of the shot is the t-thirt and it’s print, crop out her crotch area. In general I’m sure it wasn’t your intention to capture a sexual used image. But there is something about this print that makes me uncomfortable as a mother of a daughter too. It’s the angle, it’s the legs apart, its the length of the skirt in combination with the other 2 factors. it’s not necessary or an appropriate image for young girls to see of their age group to represent how they should look.
Spelt “Witchery” wrong on the home page.
Your dirty mind?
This is not tasteful creative.
The image is not tasteful at all. It wouldn’t even be tasteful if it was an adult with her legs spread open. As a mother I am appalled that any advertising agency would think this is ok!
Parent company The Country Road Group (CRG) need to pull their socks up if they reckon it’s not sexual.
Short skirts attract male eyes, end of story. Don’t put kids in that position, or adults who don’t want to feel creeped out.
Agree with A Dad.
I’m not quite sure what the issue is.
No cleavage, no makeup, monotone shot, on her own, apparently dancing to whatever.
You’re drawing a pretty long bow to claim that’s more “sexualised” than say kids swimwear or whatever weirdoes get off on.
And if you think any of it is sexual, the “hero of the shot” and your “eye is drawn to the crotch” you should slam your dick in a door.
Do you think a parent group got wind of this article?
I think we have to be very careful to exercise corporate social responsibility if we own a clothing company and use underage models. There is so much in the media now about the hyper sexualised culture and it is damaging our young people. There is no need for this shot to show her with her legs apart and such a shot skirt emphasising the crotch. A poor marketing decision by the company.